Tax Crackdown announced by Beaker
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14960364
They're employing a load more tax inspectors to ensure that the wealthy are not hiding their assets.
I assume they'll be employing a few thousand benefits inspectors too seeing as benefits fraud is a huge isue?
Eric Mc said:
Where are these 2,000 extra tax inspectors going to be magicked up from?
"The unit is being drawn from 2,250 newly-recruited tax inspectors expected to be in place within weeks."Likely to be straight out of university or courses so cheap to employ but no experience and as useful as a chocolate teapot.
..and taxing people more fairly so there's less incentive to 'avoid' tax.
As mentioned above, they're expecting to raise £2bn a year from this; I would suggest that they could 'raise' more than double this by investigating benefit fraud this year alone.
I also presume the tax inspectors will be looking closely at the portfolios, tax payments and arrangements of Government ministers as a priority? No, thought not.
As mentioned above, they're expecting to raise £2bn a year from this; I would suggest that they could 'raise' more than double this by investigating benefit fraud this year alone.
I also presume the tax inspectors will be looking closely at the portfolios, tax payments and arrangements of Government ministers as a priority? No, thought not.
FourWheelDrift said:
Eric Mc said:
Where are these 2,000 extra tax inspectors going to be magicked up from?
"The unit is being drawn from 2,250 newly-recruited tax inspectors expected to be in place within weeks."Likely to be straight out of university or courses so cheap to employ but no experience and as useful as a chocolate teapot.
What skills and knowledge will they be able to bring to the task?
Over the past few years, HMRC has encouraged all their experienced and knowledgeable people to take early retirement. Part of the reason why they are so inefficient these days is that they have far too many operatives, call centre persons and data inputters who know next to nothing about the tax system.
Funk said:
..and taxing people more fairly so there's less incentive to 'avoid' tax.
As mentioned above, they're expecting to raise £2bn a year from this; I would suggest that they could 'raise' more than double this by investigating benefit fraud this year alone.
I also presume the tax inspectors will be looking closely at the portfolios, tax payments and arrangements of Government ministers as a priority? No, thought not.
As mentioned above, they're expecting to raise £2bn a year from this; I would suggest that they could 'raise' more than double this by investigating benefit fraud this year alone.
I also presume the tax inspectors will be looking closely at the portfolios, tax payments and arrangements of Government ministers as a priority? No, thought not.
don't forget their wine cellars.Mojooo said:
Is benefit fraud investigated by councils or central government? or both?
I know housing benefit is council - is that the only one?
Depends on who the type of benefit and who pays it. Some is paid by councils - some is paid from central government organisations. It's not exactly a joined up system.I know housing benefit is council - is that the only one?
Puggit said:
2250 new inspectors, costing (complete guess) £40,000pa each to employ. Will they find £90m pa...?
I think your assumption is salary levels is probably about double what it will be (although that just changes the question to "will they dind £45 million?").I expect some of the "new inspectors" will be personnel redeployed from elsewhere within HMRC.
Eric Mc said:
Puggit said:
2250 new inspectors, costing (complete guess) £40,000pa each to employ. Will they find £90m pa...?
I think your assumption is salary levels is probably about double what it will be (although that just changes the question to "will they dind £45 million?").I expect some of the "new inspectors" will be personnel redeployed from elsewhere within HMRC.
So 2,250 extra government tax inspectors. No doubt whoever the current Sir Humphrey Appleby equivalent is at the treasury has also appointed an additional 3,000 civil service administrators to cope with the extra work. New buildings will need to be built to house the extra staff, pension funds set up, equipment such as mobiles, cars, laptops etc. A new IT system will also be needed to cope with the extra work costing £3billion which will take 7 years and be three times over budget before it's cancelled.
Cost = £4.2billion
Extra tax returned = £1.7billion
Result = -£2.5billion. A result, in government terms.
Cost = £4.2billion
Extra tax returned = £1.7billion
Result = -£2.5billion. A result, in government terms.
Eric Mc said:
Exactly.
What skills and knowledge will they be able to bring to the task?
Over the past few years, HMRC has encouraged all their experienced and knowledgeable people to take early retirement. Part of the reason why they are so inefficient these days is that they have far too many operatives, call centre persons and data inputters who know next to nothing about the tax system.
In the civil service generally, experience counts for nothing. Anyone would think they were just trying to get rid of all the old staff with their "generous" contracts so they can employ young people on worse ones. I'm sure plenty of people would think that a benefit in the long term, but in the short term there are shortcomings, to say the least.What skills and knowledge will they be able to bring to the task?
Over the past few years, HMRC has encouraged all their experienced and knowledgeable people to take early retirement. Part of the reason why they are so inefficient these days is that they have far too many operatives, call centre persons and data inputters who know next to nothing about the tax system.
the govt estimates that benefit costs the taxpayer approx £5bn a year - however this figure breaks down roughly into three equal parts of
1) deliberate fraud on the part of claimants
2) genuine mistakes made by claimants which results in them being given more than they are entitled to and
3) genuine mistakes made by officials which results in claimants being given more than they are entitled to and 3)
The benefits bill has risen from £125bn in 1996/7 to £187bn in 2009/10, but clearly this is not the result of increased fraud.The cost is higher because more people are (legitimately) claiming benefits and because an ageing population is making the cost of pensions soar. Less than 1% of people on benefits commit fraud.
Of couse if benefits claimants are committing fraud they should definitely be investigated and punished appropriately, however, the same must also apply to taxpayers also committing fraud however much they earn.
1) deliberate fraud on the part of claimants
2) genuine mistakes made by claimants which results in them being given more than they are entitled to and
3) genuine mistakes made by officials which results in claimants being given more than they are entitled to and 3)
The benefits bill has risen from £125bn in 1996/7 to £187bn in 2009/10, but clearly this is not the result of increased fraud.The cost is higher because more people are (legitimately) claiming benefits and because an ageing population is making the cost of pensions soar. Less than 1% of people on benefits commit fraud.
Of couse if benefits claimants are committing fraud they should definitely be investigated and punished appropriately, however, the same must also apply to taxpayers also committing fraud however much they earn.
Accountants will not be happy though.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff